Me too. Remember that time MLK and Ralph Abernathy ambushed a bunch of cops and tried to beat their heads in with metal bars in order to create a shipping route for terrorist armaments? That was the goal of the Montgomery bus boycott, if I recall correctly.

I’d call this a new low, but considering the source, c’mon.

But that 2 a.m. boarding of an unarmed ship with an unarmed crew, carrying no munitions or weapons, 65 miles at sea, was an act of piracy. What the Israeli commandos got is what any armed hijacker should expect who tries to steal a car from a driver who keeps a tire iron under the front seat…

But we have a blockade of Gaza, say the Israelis, and this flotilla was a provocation. Indeed, it was. And Selma was a provocation. The marchers at Edmund Pettus Bridge were disobeying orders of the governor of Alabama and state police not to march.

Yet, today, liberal Democrats who regard Martin Luther King as a moral hero for championing nonviolent civil disobedience to protest injustice are cheering not the unarmed passengers trying to break the Gaza blockade, but the Israelis enforcing the blockade…

Israel has a right to secure Gaza to deny Hamas access to weapons, especially rockets that could reach Israel. But that does not justify denying 1.5 million people what they need to live in decency.

I’d sure like to meet the “liberal Democrats” who are cheering Israel on here; aside from a few members of Congress and the staff at TNR, they appear to be voices in Buchanan’s head. My hunch is that he wrote this piece in about five minutes given that, a few paragraphs before he claims the passengers were unarmed, he acknowledges that the film proves the IDF was attacked with clubs and metal rods. Then, a few paragraphs after acknowledging that Israel has a right to secure Gaza, he insists that “the Gaza siege must end” — while insisting that Israel should be able to inspect ships and trucks. What that would mean in practice, I have no idea. Aren’t random inspections of incoming cargo still an affront to Palestinian sovereignty, which is what really galls the blockade runners? What’s so grating about this piece is that Buchanan, while skeptical of Hamas’s motives, seems to take the motives of the flotilla goons and their Turkish sponsors — whose “friendship” he spends a paragraph cooing about — at face value. That’s how you get from jihadist nuts shrieking Islamic battle cries before the boats set off and the Islamist leadership of Turkey putting on a clinic of demagoguery in the aftermath to Martin Luther King and Selma: They’re all humanitarians, aren’t they? They’re all in this for civil rights. You can’t be as shrewd a politico as Buchanan and draw this analogy innocently, which is to say, naively. You have to want to see it. And he very clearly wants to.

The latest news as I write this is that passengers onboard the next aid boat headed towards Gaza have rejected Netanyahu’s offer to land in Ashdod and have their aid shipped in from there. What a curious refusal from “humanitarians” intent on bringing aid to the suffering Palestinians. No wonder 94.4 percent of Israelis agree with the decision to stop the flotilla last week. (62.7 percent wish that it had been handled differently.) Here’s a new video released today by the IDF just hours after they claimed to have found gun-sights and cartridges on the ship, which suggests that weapons might have been brought onboard. I’m sure both reports are simply more Jew lies. They must be: Neither sounds very MLK-ish.